Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Call of function inside trigger much slower than explicit function call

From: Alexander Gorban <alex(dot)gorban(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Call of function inside trigger much slower than explicit function call
Date: 2009-02-18 10:24:07
Message-ID: 1234952647.8514.32.camel@gas-laptop (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
> Well, that does sound weird... can you post the full definition for
> the images_meta table?  Are there any other triggers on that table?
> Is it referenced by any foreign keys?  How fast is the insert if you
> drop the trigger?
> 
> ...Robert

Yes, weird. Something was wrong in my own code, after I've rewrite it to
send you full sources of problem example, execution times of image
insertion and direct scaling function call became the same. Insertion of
4000x2667px (2MB) image and direct function call for downscaling
original image to 800x600px and 128x128px both takes 1.6 sec. Sorry for
confusion. And it is almost the same time that takes command line
utility to do the task. So, practically there is no overhead of using
triggers for such purposes.

Nevertheless here is my sources, maybe there is a better way to solve
the task?
http://www.filedropper.com/imscalepgexample


In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2009-02-18 13:44:23
Subject: Re: TCP network cost
Previous:From: Rajesh Kumar MallahDate: 2009-02-18 09:03:48
Subject: Re: suggestions for postgresql setup on Dell 2950 , PERC6i controller

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group